Ijerph-20-00912 - Vai Tro Cua Da Dinh Trong Chuyen Hoa
Ijerph-20-00912 - Vai Tro Cua Da Dinh Trong Chuyen Hoa
Ijerph-20-00912 - Vai Tro Cua Da Dinh Trong Chuyen Hoa
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Review
Contribution of Genetic Polymorphisms in Human Health
Pieranna Chiarella * , Pasquale Capone and Renata Sisto
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology and Hygiene, INAIL Research,
Via Fontana Candida 1, Monteporzio Catone, 00078 Rome, Italy
* Correspondence: p.chiarella@inail.it; Tel.: +39-0694181472
Abstract: Human health is influenced by various factors; these include genetic inheritance, behavioral
lifestyle, socioeconomic and environmental conditions, and public access to care and therapies in case
of illness, with the support of the national health system. All these factors represent the starting point
for the prevention and promotion of a healthy lifestyle. However, it is not yet clear to what extent these
factors may actually affect the health of an entire population. The exposures to environmental and
occupational factors are several, most of which might be poorly known, contributing to influencing
individual health. Personal habits, including diet, smoking, alcohol, and drug consumption, together
with unhealthy behaviors, may inevitably lead people to the development of chronic diseases,
contributing to increasing aging and decreasing life expectancy. In this article, we highlight the role of
susceptibility biomarkers, i.e., the genetic polymorphisms of individuals of different ethnicities, with
particular attention to the risk factors in the response to specific exposures of Europeans. Moreover,
we discuss the role of precision medicine which is representing a new way of treating and preventing
diseases, taking into account the genetic variability of the individual with each own clinical history
and lifestyle.
Keywords: health; disease; lifestyle; genetic variability; environment; risk factor; precision medicine
1. Introduction
Citation: Chiarella, P.; Capone, P.; In the year 2020, over 4 million new cancer cases and 1.9 million cancer-related deaths
Sisto, R. Contribution of Genetic were estimated in Europe. These data, found in the same year, have a key role to assess
Polymorphisms in Human Health. and monitor cancer-control measures across Europe [1]. In general, half of the overall
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, cancer diagnoses have been identified as breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate, while
20, 912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ the most cancer incidences were found in the female breast and the male prostate [2].
ijerph20020912 Collectively, all these four cancers account for half of the overall cancer burden in the
Academic Editor: Paul B. European population, although in terms of death, the most common causes of cancer
Tchounwou have been recognized in the lung, colorectal, breast, and pancreas. If we have a look at
the life of older people in Europe, we see that the variability of life expectancy is not
Received: 7 October 2022 identical in both genders. This difference between men and women has the tendency to
Revised: 16 December 2022
disappear after reaching 80 years of age. Furthermore, men and women seem to have
Accepted: 17 December 2022
different susceptibilities to disease, confirming that female life expectancy exceeds that
Published: 4 January 2023
of males in all European countries [3,4]. Apart from cancer, the main causes of death are
circulatory diseases, followed by respiratory diseases [5]. Cardiovascular disease remains
the most common cause of death worldwide and the most common cause of death in
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Europe (Figure 1). Previous studies have reported that cardiovascular disease kills nearly
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. four million people in Europe every year, approximately 44% of all deaths, with ischemic
This article is an open access article heart disease accounting for 44% of these cardiovascular deaths and stroke accounting for
distributed under the terms and 25% [6].
conditions of the Creative Commons In elderly people, we also assist with several comorbidities, including neurological
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// disorders such as senile dementia, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s disease. Alzheimer’s dis-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ ease accounts for 60% of all dementias. This pathology is considered a chronic degenerative
4.0/). disease in the general population and has been defined by the World Health Organization
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20020912 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912 2 of 15
(WHO) as a deterioration in cognitive function [7]. At present, this morbidity has been
considered a global public health priority. In 2015, 47 million people affected by a form
of dementia were estimated in the world, over 1 million 200 thousand in Italy, with a
prevalence in the over 65-year-old population of 4.4%. The prevalence of this pathology
increases with age and is higher in women. In Italy, the prevalence in women ranges from
1.0% for the 65-69 age group to 30.8% for those over 90 years of age, compared to men,
whose
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, x values vary from 1.6% to 22.1%, respectively, with about 900,0002 people
of 18 suffering
from dementia, 600,000 of which with Alzheimer’s disease [8,9].
ancestors and depends also on specific ethnicities [11]. When the genetic basis of diseases
is taken into consideration, it is possible to distinguish two types of genes: the causative
and susceptibility genes. The causative genes are those that, if present in an altered form
(i.e., a mutation), develop the associated pathology. This is the case, for example, of certain
familial forms of Alzheimer’s dementia where only 5% of cases are linked to mutations of
known genes, so the presence of the mutated allele is necessary and sufficient to develop
the pathology condition [12]. In the case of the susceptibility genes, the presence of a
defective “allele variant” of a gene does not mean the individual will necessarily develop
the disease, but it will be more likely to develop it rather than in other individuals that do
not have it. It is clear that other factors, such as genetics and environment, will contribute
to causing some individuals to develop the disease while others do not. This is the case,
for example, for the epsilon 4 allele of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene involved in fat
metabolism where a subtype of the APOE gene is involved in Alzheimer’s disease and
in cardiovascular diseases [13]. In fact, it was more frequent in patients with sporadic
Alzheimer’s disease (in those patients who account for 95% of Alzheimer’s cases) but
it is also present in healthy individuals who will never experience Alzheimer’s in their
lifetime. In the case of Alzheimer’s, the presence of the mutated allele is neither a necessary
nor sufficient condition for the manifestation of the disease [14]. In the last 30 years, gene
polymorphisms have raised a lot of interest in many scientific fields related to both public
health and disease. Gene polymorphisms are the most common type of genetic variation
in humans. They are present in the human population at a frequency higher than 1% and
differ from DNA mutations which are generally observed at extremely low frequencies and
in a restricted number of individuals. Genetic polymorphisms are important contributors
to interindividual variation since they have been investigated as useful biomarkers in the
medical context as well as in the study of pathology, epidemiology, pharmacology, clinical
immunology, and ethnicity. While gene mutation is rare and generally known to cause a
genetic disease, gene polymorphisms are not necessarily associated with a specific disease [15].
accounts for an estimated 27% of total cancer deaths in 2015 and 20% in the EU in 2016 [24,25].
Nicotine is the primary psychoactive constituent of tobacco. Despite it is not a carcinogen,
this substance is involved in smoking in addition to the continuous exposure to toxic agents
present in tobacco smoke. Once inhaled, nicotine enters into the lungs by circulation to bind
to nicotinic cholinergic receptors. The dominant pathway of nicotine metabolism in humans
is the production of cotinine, which occurs in two steps. Cotinine is a nicotine metabolite
used to quantify exposure to active smoke, and especially to passive smoking. The CYP2A6
enzyme is responsible for the majority of nicotine metabolism and is classified into CYP2A6
genotypes with predicted phenotype groups, as described for the CYP2D6 in the above
paragraph [26]. Our analysis confirms that cancer risk due to smoking changes in different
ethnicities. Among cigarette smokers, African Americans and Native Hawaiians are more
susceptible to lung cancer than White people, Japanese Americans, and Latino people [27].
Table 1. List of specific gene polymorphisms and relative enzymes relevant to the human metabolism.
Detoxification of xenobiotics, carcinogenic substances, The distributions of GSTA1-69C > T promoter haplotypes and
therapeutic drugs, environmental toxins, and oxidative diplotypes were significantly different among the human
GST-A1
GST-A1 stress products. populations. The frequencies of GSTA1-69C > T polymorphism were
A = 0.571
rs3957357 similar to those of the African American population and the
G = 0.429
populations with White ancestry, but significantly different from
those reported for the populations with Asian ancestry [34].
Several papers published findings associating GSTP1 Ile105Val
GST-P1
GST-P1 genotypes with bronchial, childhood, or atopic asthma. Compared
A = 0.669
rs1695 with the AA genotype, the GA + GG genotype decreased lung
G = 0.331
cancer susceptibility [35].
Epoxide hydrolase
In vitro polymorphisms in exons 3 (His113Tyr) and 4 (Arg139His)
EPHX1-Ex3: lead to reduced activity (slow allele) and increased activity
EPHX1-Ex_3 rs1051740 Biotransformation enzymes converting epoxides from the T = 0.696 (fast allele).
degradation of aromatic compounds to trans-dihydrodiols C = 0.304 T to C substitution (slow allele) reduces the enzyme activity.
excreted from the body. EPHX1 was shown to take part in EPHX1-Ex4: Decreased activity (histidine)
EPHX1-Ex_4 rs2234922 protection against oxidative stress. A = 0.836 A to G substitution (fast allele) increases the enzyme activity.
G = 0.164 Increased activity (arginine) [36].
Cytochrome P450 family
CYP1A1-2A:
CYP1A1_2A Catalysis of reactions involved in the drug metabolism and
A = 0.893 The CYP1A1 Ile462Val polymorphism may enhance the
rs4646903 synthesis of cholesterol, steroids, and lipids, some of which susceptibility to cervical cancer in Caucasian females. The gene has
G = 0.107
are found in cigarette smoke. The enzyme’s endogenous been associated with lung cancer risk. Higher inducibility. Increased
CYP1A1_2C CYP1A1-2C:
substrate is able to metabolize some polycyclic aromatic oxidation [37].
rs1048943 T = 0.965
hydrocarbons into carcinogenic intermediates.
Ile462Val C = 0.035
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912 7 of 15
Table 1. Cont.
Table 1. Cont.
Table 1. Cont.
Table 1. Cont.
4. Discussion
The genome of each individual interacts with exposures to many environmental and
occupational agents, including personal habits, such as diet, drug consumption, alcohol,
and smoking. When a pathology by chance develops, all these factors influence several
aspects of a complex response exerted by the human being: the age of onset, the rate of
progression, and the therapies and side effects following medical treatments [62]. The
actual knowledge of genetics that has been influenced by genome and environmental mod-
ifications will contribute to diagnosing and treating diseases in more precise and effective
ways. The recent progress in medicine supported by novel technologies is developing
fast, modifying the concepts and ideas to treat diseases. In the last thirty years, precision
medicine started to emerge representing a new way to prevent aging and disease, taking
into account many factors, i.e., the age, the genetic variability of the individual, the clinical
history, the personal lifestyle and habit, and the effect of pharmacological treatments [63].
This novel concept is changing our perspective in terms of therapy and screening. If the
traditional protocols for diagnostics and therapeutics have been generally structured on the
basis of the average patient, precision medicine now shows a different perspective, in which
the variability of the population and ethnicity include advancements in genome sequencing,
allowing the discovery of novel mutations and other functional genes [64]. These polymor-
phic genes represent a group of susceptibility biomarkers for selected subgroups sharing
common genetic characteristics [65]. The variability in the population represents a critical
issue to develop targeted therapeutic protocols to treat diseases. In the study of disease,
we need a global assessment that takes into account not only the clinical and instrumental
examinations but also the patient’s history, familiarity, and lifestyle, together with all the
factors affecting the progression of the disease and the response to treatment. Thanks to the
identification of specific biomarkers, such as the biomarkers of exposure and effects in the
occupational context, the risk of developing a certain disease can be earlier identified. This
allows to improve preventive strategies or treatments that, if implemented early, will be
more effective to treat disease supported by reliable diagnostic tests that will help to choose
the best treatment. For instance, the analysis of the biological characteristics of a malignant
tumor will allow to select patients who will benefit from personalized treatment. If this is
not the case, the patient will be addressed immediately to alternative therapies. Reducing
the side effects of a drug and adverse reactions is another goal. Pharmacogenetics tests
may help to provide safe treatments with few adverse effects for the individual, taking into
account the genetic profile. For instance, depending on the variant allele of polymorphism,
the drug will be metabolized more or less quickly. This can explain why some patients
will suffer from adverse effects, where the drug, poorly metabolized, is accumulating in
the body, while other patients will metabolize very quickly in the absence of an effect. The
reduction in the use of invasive tests in favor of safe molecular tests is another relevant
issue. There are also pathologies, diagnoses, and follow-ups of dangerous tests, including
biopsies, that are sometimes difficult to execute and too invasive for the patient. The use of
reliable and harmless biomarkers of exposure and effect is mandatory in order to improve
the quality of the patient’s life, choosing the most suitable biological matrix that should
be easy to harvest, such as in the case of urinary sediment, exfoliated buccal cells and
blood [66,67] matrices are not invasive, easy to harvest, facilitating the type of diagnosis.
For instance, the use of oral mucosa exfoliates represents a valid alternative [68]. Differently
from blood, the buccal cells are easy to harvest by self-made mouthwash or scraping, do
not require specialized staff or equipment, and ensure good DNA yield with a low risk [66].
However, the most relevant advantage of using blood is the plasma collection, useful for
biochemical analysis, and the harvesting of a high number of peripheral mononuclear
cells that may be used for several DNA analyses, including genetic polymorphisms and
molecular biology tests [69]. The only critical issue of blood accruing is the expertise of
the operator who should avoid pain and the risk of infection for the patient. On the other
hand, despite urine being rarely used for genotyping, due to the presence of a mixed cell
population (leukocytes, renal tubular, transitional urothelial, and squamous cells), there
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912 12 of 15
are novel alternatives and useful kits to extract cells. However, no matter what biological
matrix is used for genetic analysis, urine sample collection is mandatory for the assessment
of internal dose biomarkers.
5. Conclusions
The effect of exposure to health hazards means that individuals and groups in the
population are more or less likely to develop diseases after a potentially dangerous expo-
sure. This condition, apparent or silent, is not only due to genetic inheritance but also to
individual behavior and personal habits. People are more or less used to consuming drugs,
drinking alcohol, and smoking [70]. In small amounts, the organism is able to detoxify the
substance, but there are people with poorly efficient metabolisms due to their inherited ge-
netic variability that differs from other individuals. Furthermore, the interethnic difference
in the consumption of certain substances might have severe adverse effects or no efficacy at
all, depending on the genotype. In the past, particularly around the year 1970, people did
not pay particular attention to keeping themselves healthy [71,72]. Common habits and
lifestyles changed many years later, when alcohol consumption, heavy smoking, and the
abuse of psychotropic drugs were reduced [73]. However, despite the current perception of
living with a correct habit and lifestyle, nobody can predict the duration of life expectancy.
The last decade has seen many advances in proteomics and genomics science, and precision
medicine emerged, representing a new concept of dealing with and preventing diseases,
taking into account the genetic variability of the individual, the clinical history, and the
lifestyle. Precision medicine is based on the decision to prescribe a specific drug suitable for
the individual’s genotype with the aim of maximizing the efficacy of the drug by mitigating
the risks of the ethnic group to which the patient belongs. In the absence of a genotyping
test, ethnicity is seen as a model of the patient’s probable genotype, based on the frequency
of genetic variations with some ethnic characteristics [68]. Precision medicine aims to
develop effective strategies for patient groups who share specific genetic and molecular
common traits. This novel science studies how the genetic structure of human beings
influences the action of drugs administered to patients, with the ultimate goal of predicting
and therefore preventing adverse reactions and/or therapeutic failures [74]. In particular,
there is a need for the right drug against a specific disease with the correct dosage for
patients who share common characteristics. The idea of precision medicine will change the
approach to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. This method involves
a significant change of perspective: traditional diagnostic and therapeutic protocols have
been generally structured on the basis of the “average patient”, while precision medicine
intends to take into account the variability of the population, in order to develop targeted
therapies for selected subgroups with common traits. The genetic variability of a popula-
tion, including the polymorphic genes presented in this article, becomes fundamental in
order to develop tailored therapeutic protocols. Anyway, the right drug should be available
at the right dose and to the right genotype. Recognizing the importance of interethnic
differences in drug response, it is not surprising that regulatory authorities will require the
adequate participation of various demographic subgroups of patients by gender, ethnicity,
and age in clinical trials. This is fundamental to assessing safety and efficacy data in these
subgroups [75,76].
Author Contributions: All the authors contributed to the elaboration of this manuscript. P.C. (Pier-
anna Chiarella); conceptualization, investigation of the research articles and polymorphisms, writing
of original draft preparation; P.C. (Pasquale Capone); analysis and study of selected scientific liter-
ature and contribution to manuscript and bibliography; R.S.; manuscript correction, editing, and
supervision. Authorship has been limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work
reported. All the authors gave their consent to publish this article and checked, commented, and
reviewed the manuscript prior to submission. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912 13 of 15
Institutional Review Board Statement: This study did not required ethical approval.
Informed Consent Statement: All the authors gave their consent to publish this article and checked,
commented, and reviewed the manuscript prior to submission.
Data Availability Statement: Genotype and allele frequencies have been down-loaded from the
Ensembl project of genome databases for vertebrates and other eukaryotic species http://grch37.
ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Variation, public database (accessed on 2 September 2022).
Acknowledgments: We thank Giovanna Tranfo for the opportunity to participate in the proposed
Special Issue.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Dyba, T.; Randi, G.; Bray, F.; Martos, C.; Giusti, F.; Nicholson, N.; Gavin, A.; Flego, M.; Neamtiu, L.; Dimitrova, N.; et al. The
European cancer burden in 2020. Incidence and mortality estimates for 40 countries and 25 major cancers. Eur. J. Cancer 2021, 157,
308–347. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Kotwal, A.A.; Schonberg, M.A. Cancer screening in the elderly: A review of breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer screening.
Cancer J. 2017, 23, 246–253. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Barford, A.; Dorling, D.; Davey Smith, G.; Shaw, M. Life expectancy: Women now on top everywhere. BMJ 2006, 332, 808.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Chiarella, P.; Capone, P.; Sisto, R. Polymorphic genes and gender difference: Analysis of a European sample. Ital. J. Occup. Environ.
Hyg. 2021, 12, 156–166. [CrossRef]
5. OECD/European Union. Health at a Glance: Europe 2020: State of Health in the EU Cycle; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2020; pp.
1–237. [CrossRef]
6. Townsend, N.; Kazakiewicz, D.; Wright, F.L.; Timmis, A.; Huculeci, R.; Torbica, A.; Gale, C.P.; Achenbach, S.; Weidinger, F.; Vardas,
P. Epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in Europe. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2022, 19, 133–143. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Gauthier, S.; Rosa-Neto, P.; Morais, J.A.; Webster, C. Journey through the diagnosis of dementia. In World Alzheimer Report 2021;
Alzheimer’s Disease International: London, England, 2021; pp. 1–313.
8. Jeorges, J.; Miller, O.; Bintener, C. Dementia in Europe Yearbook 2019: Estimating the Prevalence of Dementia in Europe; Alzheimer
Europe: Luxembourg, 2020; pp. 1–109, ISBN 978-99959-995-9-9. [CrossRef]
9. Regional Epidemiological Service and Epidemiological Data Registers. Available online: https://demenze.regione.veneto.it/
PDTA/dati (accessed on 2 September 2022).
10. Jackson, S.; Bartek, P.J. The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease. Nature 2009, 461, 1071–1078. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
11. Orgogozo, V.; Morizot, B.; Martin, A. The differential view of genotype-phenotype relationships. Front. Genet. 2015, 6, 179.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Bekris, L.M.; Yum, C.-E.; Bird, T.D.; Tsuang, D. Genetics of Alzheimer disease. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2010, 23, 213–227. [CrossRef]
13. Chouinard-Watkins, R.; Plourde, M. Fatty acid metabolism in carriers of Apolipoprotein e Epsilon 4 allele: Is it contributing to
higher risk of cognitive decline and coronary heart disease? Nutrients 2014, 6, 4452–4471. [CrossRef]
14. Tarawneh, R.; Holtzman, D.M. The Clinical Problem of Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment. Cold
Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2012, 2, a006148. [CrossRef]
15. Giuffrè; Bianchi, A.; Gulotta, G.; Sartori, G. (Eds.) Role of behavioural and genetic factors. In Neuroscience Forensic Manual; Giuffrè:
Milan, Italy, 2009; pp. 69–90, ISBN 9788814148590.
16. Prüss-Üstün, A.; Corvalán, C.; WHO. Preventing Disease through Healthy Environments: Towards an Estimate of the Environmental
Burden of Disease; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006; ISBN 92 4 159382 2.
17. Chiarella, P.; Capone, P.; Carbonari, D.; Sisto, R. A predictive model assessing genetic susceptibility risk at workplace. Int. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2012. [CrossRef]
18. Chiarella, P.; Capone, P.; Sisto, R. The Role of Genetic Polymorphisms in the occupational exposure. In The Recent Topics in Genetic
Polymorphisms; Caliskan, M., Erol, O., Öz, G.C., Eds.; Intech Open: London, UK, 2019; pp. 1–16.
19. Topic, E. The role of pharmacogenetics in management of cardiovascular disease. J. Int. Fed. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 2003, 14, 78–88.
20. Rommel, G.T.; Kim, R.B. Introduction to Clinical Pharmacology. In Clinical and Translational Science, 2nd ed.; Robertson, D.,
Williams, G., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 365–388.
21. Belle, D.J.; Singh, H. Genetic factors in drug metabolism. Am. Fam. Physician 2008, 77, 1553–1560.
22. Ingelman-Sundberg, M. Genetic polymorphisms of cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6): Clinical consequences, evolutionary aspects
and functional diversity. Pharm. J. 2005, 5, 6–13. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. World Bank. World Bank Report on the Economics of Tobacco Control; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 1999.
24. Tobacco Advertising Ban Takes Effect 31 July. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_05
_1013 (accessed on 3 July 2022).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912 14 of 15
25. Murphy, S.E. Nicotine metabolism and smoking: Ethnic differences in the role of P450 2A6. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2017, 30, 410–419.
[CrossRef]
26. Derby, K.S.; Cuthrell, K.; Caberto, C.; Carmella, S.G.; Franke, A.A.; Hecht, S.S.; Murphy, S.E.; Le Marchand, L. Nicotine metabolism
in three ethnic/racial groups with different risks of lung cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2008, 17, 3526–3535. [CrossRef]
27. Haiman, C.A.; Stram, O.D.; Wilkens, L.; Pike, C.M.; Malcolm, C.; Kolonel, L.N.; Henderson, B.E.; Le Marchand, L. Nicotine
metabolism in three ethnical/ratial groups with different risk of lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006, 26, 333–342. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
28. Patel, Y.M.; Park, S.L.; Han, Y.; Wilkens, L.R.; Bickeböller, H.; Rosenberger, A.; Caporaso, N.; Landi, M.T.; Brüske, I.; Risch, A.; et al.
Novel association of genetic markers affecting CYP2A6 activity and lung cancer risk. Cancer Res. 2016, 76, 5768–5776. [CrossRef]
29. Rehm, J. The risks associated with alcohol use and alcoholism. Alcohol Res. Health 2011, 34, 135–143.
30. Edenberg, H.; Foroud, T. The genetics of alcoholism: Identifying specific genes through family studies. Addict. Biol. 2006, 11,
386–396. [CrossRef]
31. Kitson, K. Regulation of Alcohol and Aldehyde dehydrogenase activity: A metabolic balancing act with important social
consequences. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 1999, 23, 955–957. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Wall, T.; Luczak, S.E.; Hiller-Sturmhofel, S. Biology, Genetics and Environment: Underlying factor influencing alcohol metabolism.
Alcohol Res. Curr. Rev. 2016, 38, 59–68.
33. Edenberg, H.J. The genetics of alcohol metabolism: Role of alcohol dehydrogenase and aldehyde dehydrogenase variants. Alcohol
Res. Health 2007, 30, 5–13.
34. Rashidi, W.N.W.; Bakar, S.A. Glutathione S-Transferase: An overview on distribution of GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms in
Malaysian and other populations. Mal. J. Med. Health Sci. 2019, 15, 85–95.
35. Uckun Şahinoğulları, Z. Frequencies of glutathione S-transferase A1 rs3957357 polymorphism in a Turkish population. J. Surg.
Med. 2021, 5, 221–225. [CrossRef]
36. Xiao, J.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Li, Y.; Xu, C.; Xiao, M.; Wang, H.; Guo, S.; Jin, L.; et al. The relevance analysis of GSTP1
rs1695 and lung cancer in the Chinese Han population. Int. J. Biol. Mark. 2021, 36, 48–54. [CrossRef]
37. Agudo, A.; Peluso, M.; Sala, N.; Capellà, G.; Munnia, A.; Piro, S.; Marín, F.; Ibáñez, R.; Amiano, P.; Tormo, M.J.; et al. Aromatic
DNA adducts and polymorphisms in metabolic genes in healthy adults: Findings from the EPIC-Spain cohort. Carcinogenesis
2009, 30, 968–976. [CrossRef]
38. Wang, L.N.; Wang, F.; Liu, J.; Ying-Hui, J.; Fang, C.; Ren, X.Q. CYP1A1 Ile462Val polymorphism is associated with cervical cancer
risk in Caucasians not Asians: A Meta-Analysis. Front. Physiol. 2017, 8, 1081. [CrossRef]
39. Haufroid, V.; Jakubowski, M.; Janasikb, B.; Ligocka, D.; Buchet, J.P.; Bergamaschi, E.; Manini, P.; Mutti, A.; Ghittorid, S.; Arande,
M.; et al. Interest of genotyping and phenotyping of drug-metabolizing enzymes for the interpretation of biological monitoring of
exposure to styrene. Pharmacogenetics 2002, 12, 691–702. [CrossRef]
40. Del Tredici, A.L.; Malhotra, A.; Dedek, M.; Espin, F.; Roach, D.; Zhu, G.D.; Voland, J.; Moreno, T.A. Frequency of CYP2D6 alleles
including structural variants in the United States. Front. Pharmacol. 2018, 9, 305. [CrossRef]
41. Windmill, K.F.; Gaedigk, A.; Hall, P.M.; Samaratunga, H.; Grant, D.M.; McManu, M.E. Localization of N-Acetyltransferases NAT1
and NAT2 in human tissues. Toxicol. Sci. 2000, 54, 19–29. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Matejcic, M.; Vogelsang, M.; Wang, Y.; Parker, I.M. NAT1 and NAT2 genetic polymorphisms and environmental exposure as risk
factors for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A case-control study. BMC Cancer 2015, 15, 150. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Reynolds, W.F.; Hiltunen, M.; Pirskanen, M.; Mannermaa, A.; Helisalmi, S.; Lehtovirta, M.; Alafuzoff, I.; Soininen, H. MPO and
APO Eepsilon4 polymorphisms interact to increase risk for AD in Finnish males. Neurology 2000, 55, 1284–1290. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
44. Reynolds, W.F.; Rhees, J.; Maciejewski, D.; Paladino, T.; Sieburg, H.; Maki, R.A.; Masliah, E. Myeloperoxidase polymorphism is
associated with gender specific risk for Alzheimer’s disease. Exp. Neurol. 1999, 155, 31–41. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
45. Mateo, I.; Sánchez-Juan, P.; Rodríguez-Rodríguez, E.; Infante, J.; Vázquez-Higuera, J.L.; García-Gorostiaga, I.; Berciano, J.;
Combarros, O. Synergistic effect of heme oxygenase-1 and tau genetic variants on Alzheimer’s disease risk. Dement Geriatr. Cogn.
Disord. 2008, 26, 339–342. [CrossRef]
46. Möllsten, A.; Marklund, S.L.; Wessman, M.; Svensson, M.; Forsblom, C.; Parkkonen, M.; Brismar, K.; Groop, P.H.; Dahlquist, G. A
functional polymorphism in the manganese superoxide dismutase gene and diabetic nephropathy. Diabetes 2007, 56, 265–269.
[CrossRef]
47. Honkura, Y.; Matsuo, H.; Murakami, S.; Sakiyama, M.; Mizutari, K.; Shiotani, A.; Yamamoto, M.; Morita, I.; Shinomiya, N.;
Kawase, T.; et al. NRF2 Is a key target for prevention of noise-induced hearing loss by reducing oxidative damage of cochlea. Sci.
Rep. 2016, 6, 19329. [CrossRef]
48. Okano, Y.; Nezu, U.; Enokida, Y.; Lee, M.T.; Kinoshita, H.; Lezhava, A.; Hayashizaki, Y.; Morita, S.; Taguri, M.; Ichikawa, Y.;
et al. SNP (-617C>A) in ARE-like loci of the NRF2 gene: A new biomarker for prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma in Japanese
non-smoking women. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e73794. [CrossRef]
49. Teena, R.; Dhamodharan, U.; Ali, D.; Rajesh, K.; Ramkumar, K.M. Genetic Polymorphism of the Nrf2 promoter region (rs35652124)
is associated with the risk of diabetic foot ulcers. Oxid. Med. Cell Longev. 2020, 2020, 9825028. [CrossRef]
50. Liu, F.; Luo, L.; Wei, Y.; Wang, W.; Li, B.; Yan, L.; Wen, T. A functional NQO1 609C>T polymorphism and risk of hepatocellular
carcinoma in a Chinese population. Tumour Biol. 2013, 34, 47–53. [CrossRef]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 912 15 of 15
51. Hsu, P.C.; Chen, C.C.; Tzeng, H.E.; Hsu, Y.N.; Kuo, C.C.; Lin, M.L.; Chang, W.S.; Wang, Y.C.; Tsai, C.W.; Pei, J.S.; et al. HOGG1
rs1052133 Genotypes and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in a taiwanese population. In Vivo 2019, 33, 1081–1086.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
52. Chen, Y.; Li, T.; Li, J.; Mo, Z. X-ray repair cross-complementing group 1 (XRCC1) Arg399Gln polymorphism significantly
associated with prostate cancer. Int. J. Biol. Mark. 2015, 30, e12–e21. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53. Smith, T.R.; Miller, M.S.; Lohman, K.; Lange, E.M.; Case, L.D.; Mohrenweiser, H.W.; Hu, J.J. Polymorphisms of XRCC1 and
XRCC3 genes and susceptibility to breast cancer. Cancer Lett. 2003, 190, 183–190. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Salimzadeh, H.; Lindskog, E.B.; Gustavsson, B.; Wettergren, Y.; Ljungman, D. Association of DNA repair gene variants with
colorectal cancer: Risk, toxicity, and survival. BMC Cancer 2020, 20, 409. [CrossRef]
55. Li, D.; Zhao, H.; Gelernter, J. Strong association of the alcohol dehydrogenase 1B gene (ADH1B) with alcohol dependence and
alcohol-induced medical diseases. Biol. Psychiatry 2011, 70, 504–512. [CrossRef]
56. Thomasson, H.; Beard, J.D.; Li, T.K. ADH2 gene polymorphisms are determinants of alcohol pharmacokinetics. Alcohol Clin. Exp.
Res. 1995, 19, 1494–1499. [CrossRef]
57. Xue, Y.; Wang, M.; Zhong, D.; Tong, N.; Chu, H.; Sheng, X.; Zhang, Z. ADH1C Ile350Val polymorphism and cancer risk: Evidence
from 35 case-control studies. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e37227. [CrossRef]
58. Xu, X.-L.; Wang, J.; Zhu, S.-M.; Yang, M.; Fang, Y.; Qian, S.; An, Z.; Mao., W. Impact of alcohol dehydrogenase gene 4
polymorphisms on esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma risk in a Chinese population. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015, 33 (Suppl. S15), e15021.
[CrossRef]
59. Chang, B.; Hao, S.; Zhang, L.; Gao, M.; Sun, Y.; Huang, A.; Teng, G.; Li, B.; Crabb, D.W.; Kusumanchi, P.; et al. Association
between aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 Glu504Lys polymorphism and alcoholic liver disease. Am. J. Med. Sci. 2018, 356, 10–14.
[CrossRef]
60. Denny, J.C.; Collins, F.S. Precision medicine in 2030-seven ways to transform healthcare. Cell 2021, 184, 1415–1419. [CrossRef]
61. Velmovitsky, P.E.; Bevilacqua, T.; Alencar, P.; Cowan, D.; Morita, P.P. Convergence of precision medicine and public health into
precision public health: Toward a big data perspective. Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 561873. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
62. Huang, T.; Shu, Y.; Cai, Y.D. Genetic differences among ethnic groups. BMC Genom. 2015, 16, 1093. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
63. Esteban, M.; Castaño, A. Non-invasive matrices in human biomonitoring: A review. Environ. Int. 2009, 35, 438–449. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
64. Bergdahl, I.A.; Skerfving, S. Biomonitoring of lead exposure-alternatives to blood. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 2008, 71, 1235–1243.
[CrossRef]
65. Lum, A.; Le Marchand, L. A simple mouthwash method for obtaining genomic DNA in molecular epidemiological studies.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 1998, 7, 719–724.
66. Feigelson, H.S.; Rodriguez, C.; Welch, R.; Hutchinson, A.; Shao, W.; Jacobs, K.; Diver, W.R.; Calle, E.E.; Thun, M.J.; Hunter, D.J.;
et al. Successful genome-wide scan in paired blood and buccal samples. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2007, 16, 1023–1025.
[CrossRef]
67. Mold, A.; Beccaria, F.; Berridge, V.; Eisenbach-Stangl, I.; Herczyńska, G.; Moskalewicz, J.; Petrilli, E.; Taylor, S. Concepts of
addiction in Europe in the 1970s and 1980s: What does a long view tell us about drugs, alcohol, and tobacco? In Concepts of
Addictive Substances and Behaviours across Time and Place; Hellman, M., Berridge, V., Duke, K., Mold, A., Eds.; Oxford University
Press: Oxford, UK, 2016; pp. 15–32. [CrossRef]
68. Ghatak, S.; Muthukumaran, R.B.; Nachimuthu, S.K. A simple method of genomic DNA extraction from human samples for
PCR-RFLP analysis. J. Biomol. Tech. 2013, 24, 224–231. [CrossRef]
69. National Human Genome Research Institute. Available online: https://www.genome.gov/ (accessed on 2 September 2022).
70. Almazroo, O.A.; Miah, M.K.; Venkataramanan, R. Drug Metabolism in the liver. Clin. Liver Dis. 2017, 21, 1–20. [CrossRef]
71. Kielholz, P. Alcohol and Depression. Br. J. Addict. Alcohol Other Drugs 1970, 65, 187–193. [CrossRef]
72. Warner, K.E. Cigarette Smoking in the 1970’s: The Impact of the Antismoking Campaign on Consumption. Science 1981, 211,
729–731. [CrossRef]
73. Hahn, M.; Roll, S.C. The Influence of pharmacogenetics on the clinical relevance of pharmacokinetic drug–drug interactions:
Drug–gene, drug–gene–gene and drug–drug–gene interactions. Pharmaceuticals 2021, 14, 487. [CrossRef]
74. Krainca, T.; Fuentesa, A. Genetic ancestry in precision medicine is reshaping the race debate. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119,
e2203033119. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75. Traversi, D.; Pulliero, A.; Izzotti, A.; Franchitti, E.; Iacoviello, L.; Gianfagna, F.; Gialluisi, A.; Izzi, B.; Agodi, A.; Barchitta, M.; et al.
Precision medicine and public health: New challenges for effective and sustainable health. J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11, 135. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
76. Shah, R.R.; Gaedigk, A. Precision medicine: Does ethnicity information complement genotype-based prescribing decisions? Ther.
Adv. Drug Saf. 2018, 9, 45–62. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.